Aldgate post office location

[Joshua Rogan]

Daily Telegraph 2nd Oct

"The Aldgate post-office backs upon the rear of some newly-erected and untenanted warehouses in Duke-street. On Saturday evening at half-past eight o'clock everything was safe, and the premises were locked up. Yesterday morning at eight o'clock, when the staff resumed duty, it was discovered that either on Saturday night, or Sunday night, burglars had affected an entrance and broke open the tills, from which they took stamps of all values, from ½d to 10s, to the total amount of £260, besides £50 in cash. The cellar lights of the warehouses in Duke-street were broken, and it was in this way that the thieves obtained access. Then they scaled the roofs, and got through a trap in the upper part of the post-office. They crept downstairs, and in order to avoid being seen through the windows opening into the street they judged it necessary to work their way to the apartment where the safe was placed in a roundabout manner. They pulled up a part of the staircase, and went through the cellar. Apparently they were engaged several hours upon the place, as they had to force open some drawers. Before going away with their booty they carefully washed their hands. In its connection with the investigation of the murder near at hand, the fact that the post-office was entered by way of the insecure premises in Duke-street shows that the burglary must have been committed on Saturday night, for throughout Sunday the street was thronged with people."

[Joshua Rogan]

Aha! This report from the Daily News 2nd Oct seems to confirm my theory that the empty building may have been newly built;

Nevertheless, the police seem certainly to have been caught napping in a manner which yesterday morning appeared to afford very general amusement to the crowds assembling in and about Duke-street. While the spot was literally garrisoned with police, and everybody's attention was absorbed in the one great calamity, it was found that burglars had taken advantage of the occasion to slip into unoccupied new premises in Duke-street and work their way thence into the post-office fronting Aldgate and commit robbery to a considerable extent. Whether this was effected before the excitement over the murders arose, or as quite conceivable in the very midst of the general agitation and absorption of attention, we have at present no information.

Also, Philip Sugden's "Complete History" mentions in the index that the Post Office was between Duke St and Houndsditch, although sadly he doesn't seem to say how he found this out.

[Joshua Rogan]

The Goad map shows a couple of warehouses near no.2 High Street, and also handy skylights which may have been the means of entry. There seems to be an empty lot at the back, however by 1894 there are a couple of buildings there between Duke St and Hanover Place. If these had just been built in 1888, could they be the empty buildings where the thieves got in?

Another snippet from The Star 1st Oct reveals that at least some of the vacant lots in Duke Street shown on the 1887 map had been built on by 1888;

"Mrs. Lindsay, who occupies the two front rooms of 11, Duke-street - almost opposite Church-passage, leading to the court"

Number 11 didn't exist in 1887, the map shows a blank space between 8 and 14. Likewise nothing is shown between Aldgate and no.7 but if these had all been redeveloped (as per the OS map) by the time of the Eddowes murder then there would have been a building on Duke Street behind the new Post Office.
If.

[Debra A]

My mistake, I got confused. But even if I don't always understand your posts right away, I always appreciate them.

No worries, Joshua. I find the land tax records just as confusing and frustrating sometimes. Although I did manage to find the name of the person listed at 29 Aldgate High Street in 1888 the other day, showing the address does seem to have existed in 88. This is the address Eddowes was arrested outside the evening before her death. A William Hatterley, ironmonger was listed there in 1888. Interestingly a cousin of Thomas Cutbush was listed with a business three doors down at #30!

[Joshua Rogan]

I just posted what was in the land tax records at 19/20 Aldgate and mentioned the 88 entry did not have 'postmaster general' alongside Eliza Jones in 88 like it did in 87 (crossed through in 87) Eliza was still listed at 19/20 in 88. Was she the post mistress? Or was she the tobbacconist that also occupied the building? I was just relating what the Land Tax Records say to try and help.

Gav's articles are Rip 74 and 75 btw.

My mistake, I got confused. But even if I don't always understand your posts right away, I always appreciate them.

[Debra A]

Oh, I'm confused - I thought your earlier post said that 19/20 Aldgate was only listed for 1887?
There's something about the mere mention of tax affairs that muddles my brain.

The only mentions of the robbery I've found so far (albeit seemingly all from the same source) refer to the Post Office address as High Street, Aldgate. Which, if the old PO was in Aldgate, seems to point to the robbery taking place at the relocated site...?

I just posted what was in the land tax records at 19/20 Aldgate and mentioned the 88 entry did not have 'postmaster general' alongside Eliza Jones in 88 like it did in 87 (crossed through in 87) Eliza was still listed at 19/20 in 88. Was she the post mistress? Or was she the tobbacconist that also occupied the building? I was just relating what the Land Tax Records say to try and help.

Gav's articles are Rip 74 and 75 btw.

[Wickerman]

The Star 1st Oct describes it as;

"Aldgate Post-office, the back part of which looks out on the scene of the murder"

This seems somewhat optimistic, since neither building has anything like a view of Mitre Square, as far as the maps show.

Correct, "Aldgate Post Office" is the address at 19/20 Aldgate, but it's a bit of a stretch to say you can view the murder sight from there.

[Joshua Rogan]

The Star 1st Oct describes it as;

"Aldgate Post-office, the back part of which looks out on the scene of the murder"

This seems somewhat optimistic, since neither building has anything like a view of Mitre Square, as far as the maps show.

[Joshua Rogan]

I don't have a clue either other than it seems to be saying 19/20 Aldgate was not in use from the start of the tax year March/April 89 until Sept 1889, when it was excempt from tax. The full amount was payable March/April 88 until March/April 89 though so I am guessing it was occupied the whole of 88 in that case? Just a guess though.

Oh, I'm confused - I thought your earlier post said that 19/20 Aldgate was only listed for 1887?
There's something about the mere mention of tax affairs that muddles my brain.

The only mentions of the robbery I've found so far (albeit seemingly all from the same source) refer to the Post Office address as High Street, Aldgate. Which, if the old PO was in Aldgate, seems to point to the robbery taking place at the relocated site...?

[Debra A]

Hmmm. Thanks Debs.... I just wish I was fiscally savvy enough to know what that meant.

I don't have a clue either other than it seems to be saying 19/20 Aldgate was not in use from the start of the tax year March/April 89 until Sept 1889, when it was excempt from tax. The full amount was payable March/April 88 until March/April 89 though so I am guessing it was occupied the whole of 88 in that case? Just a guess though.

[Joshua Rogan]

Hmmm. Thanks Debs.... I just wish I was fiscally savvy enough to know what that meant.

[Debra A]

Does that work the other way around? That is, if the original PO isn't listed in the 1888 register, it must have moved by 24th March 1888?

The 1888 register covers the timeframe March/April 1888 to March 24th 1889. In the 1889 register there is a notation 'Reclaimed from 29 Sept 1889' in the value colums and also the date 23 March 89 is noted so it looks like the property owner was exempt between those two dates at least?

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Joshua


this was discussed in some detail in Gavin Bromley's article on Mitre Square in Ripperologist #74, and I don't think there was a clear answer.

not read the article in sometime, so may be worth having a look.


Steve

Thanks for the pointer Steve. Any chance you (or anyone) could provide a link? For some reason my browser refuses to let me see the older issues...

[Joshua Rogan]

Perhaps it was the predictably easy access to the existing P.O. (ie; this burglary) that persuaded the authorities to relocate the P.O.?

That's a very good point!

[Joshua Rogan]

I think you are right, Jon.
The Land Tax Register assesments were for the year 1888, ending 24th March 1889 so the change in address could have been any time up to that date.

Does that work the other way around? That is, if the original PO isn't listed in the 1888 register, it must have moved by 24th March 1888?